 |
 |
Hi Antonio, I'm a bit puzzled that by just randomizing the factors you get now smaller errors compared to a fit!? Cheers, Heiko On Fri, 15 Sep 2006, Antonio Petrella wrote: > Hi Heiko, > what I recomputed are the systematics on datasets with B/D reweighing > and with different ip cuts (without fitting S/P but randomizing the > factors...) > > ip > 0.20 ~12% > ip > 0.30 ~14% > ip > 0.40 ~9% > ip > 0.50 ~32% > > Cheers, > Anotonio > > Heiko Lacker wrote: > > Does this affect also the other numbers? > > In particular, the systematics from S/P when only randomizing > > the numbers bin-by-bin? > > > > Could you please provide all plots showing the > > PartialBRBR distribution from the randomization? > > > > Cheers, > > Heiko > > > > On Fri, 15 Sep 2006, Antonio Petrella wrote: > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> unfortunately there was a bug in the macro to compute the systematics > >> due to S/P fit. I found it and re run the computation for the cases: > >> > >> 1- linear fit starting from the 2" bin; > >> 2- gaussian fit. > >> > >> In both cases there is a worsening wrt the previous estimate: > >> > >> 1: 35.7% (wrong old estimate: 22.5%) > >> 2: 41.4%. (wrong old estimate: 22%). > >> > >> Plots of the PBrBr distribution are attached with this mail. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Antonio > >> >